Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Mitt Romney: His Claims as Governor Don't Match The Facts

http://www.2partyReform.blogspot.com/
finding practical ways to move from a republic towards a democracy and holding the media accountable for substantive, critical reporting of important issues....

A candidate's record of legislation they supported and opposed in their years of public service is the most relevant information voters can rely on to determine their choices. A legislator must be judged on their yays and nays on bills and an executive must be judged on all bills signed into legislation, those vetoed, and those bills championed by the executive but not passed by the legislature.....

Rick Byerly

Please note that anything not in italics are comments by myself...

.....

The mainstream media seems content to allow Mitt Romney the "latitude" of claiming many things as a one term Governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007. Below you will see his claims and what really happened. Multiple news sources are cited but not blogs or posts from websites of groups/organizations etc. Since Mitt Romney claims his experience as an executive is what makes him more qualified than John McCain let's see what his one term as Massachusetts Governor really brought...

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/specials/romney/articles/part6_main/?page=full

Source is the Boston Globe- others are cited at the bottom.

A major claim from Mitt Romney:

The website of his presidential campaign summarizes his version of history: ''Without raising taxes or increasing debt, Governor Romney closed a $3 billion budget deficit his first year in office with a heavily Democrat (sic) legislature. Each year, Governor Romney filed a balanced budget without raising taxes. By eliminating waste, streamlining government, and enacting comprehensive economic reforms to help spur growth, Governor Romney helped the state achieve a surplus totaling nearly $1 billion in 2005.''

what the Globe says:

Romney and the Legislature did approve an austere budget to deal with nearly all of a projected shortfall, which never fully materialized because tax collections came in more than $1.2 billion above preliminary estimates. The spending plan also raised at least $331 million through increased fees for permits, licenses, and services - about a 45-percent jump - and $128 million in tax code tweakings to close ''loopholes'' affecting businesses. Another $181 million in ''loophole'' closings - businesses called them tax increases - followed in the next two years.

Romney didn't raise taxes?

Data compiled by The Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan research group in Washington, shows that during Romney's four years as governor, the state and local tax burden in Massachusetts increased from 10 percent to 10.6 percent of per capita income.

a 1 Billion Dollar Surplus from Romney?

Of Romney's assertion about the 2005 surplus, ''There never was a $1 billion surplus,'' said Michael J. Widmer, president of the business-funded Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.

The state comptroller's office reported a surplus of $594.4 million, but Widmer said that overstates the true surplus because it includes a $150-million accounting change that pushed payment of Medicaid bills into the next fiscal year.

Early in his administration, Romney contended that he squeezed more than $1 billion in waste out of the budget. ''I said at the time it was no more than $100 million in waste he eliminated through reforms, and I was being very generous,'' Widmer said. ''Reform had next to nothing to do with the change in the state's financial picture.''

more details about Romney's record:

Romney has asserted that the fee increases totaled only $260 million in fiscal 2004 but that ignores at least $71 million in new fees implemented shortly after he took office.
One major fee hike was clearly excessive - a 2-cent-per-gallon increase in a special gasoline fee, implemented during the fiscal crisis without fanfare, even though it affects every motorist in the state.
The increase generates about $60 million per year for a program to clean up contamination around underground fuel storage tanks, but since its inception has produced surpluses of more than $40 million a year above the actual cost of the program, according to a report done by the Department of Revenue in response to a Globe request.
Raised from half a cent to 2.5 cents per gallon in April 2003, ostensibly to pay for a backlog of cleanup claims, the fee is on top of the 21-cent-per-gallon state tax on gasoline.


More Sources:

http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071213/NEWS08/312130115/-1/news08

Tax Cuts and Romney:

When it comes to cutting federal taxes, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's plans are bold and sweeping.He promises to eliminate all taxes on savings and investment for the middle class, slash the corporate income tax rate by nearly 30 percent and make all the Bush tax cuts permanent.

But as governor of Massachusetts, Romney had only one bold tax-cutting idea: reduce the state income tax from 5.3 percent to 5 percent. And on that cause, he failed.

No way! What about the tax cuts everyone keeps talking about he brought forth in Massachusetts?

Romney was able to get through tax cuts totaling about $70 million a year, as well as a one-time $250 million capital gains tax rebate on revenue collected in 2002. However, Romney also raised fees and eliminated corporate tax loopholes to generate close to $400 million needed to help balance the state budget, which faced a large deficit when he took office. He also cut spending to make up part of that deficit.

Yeah but that's a tough state to lower taxes overall in, right?

"...the two elected Republican governors before Romney – Bill Weld and Paul Cellucci – both secured big tax breaks."

But didn't Weld have veto powers that Romney didn't?

Former Massachusetts Lt. Gov. Jane Swift said Romney has a weak defense because Weld only had enough Republican state senators to sustain a veto the first two of his eight years in office.

Mitt Romney signed legislation which forced all citizens of Massachusetts to buy health insurance or pay a fine....

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200606u/nj_crook_2006-06-27

When the law goes into effect in July 2007, every resident will have to have health insurance. Residents who don't have an employer-provided scheme and who are ineligible for Medicare or Medicaid will have to buy insurance for themselves.

So is Mitt Romney for universal health care then?

You have to read the whole article as there's a lot details!

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200606u/nj_crook_2006-06-27

other sources about Mitt Romney's record:

http://concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070503/REPOSITORY/705030311

http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9441455



[what:pittsburgh,reform,us,city,state,council,politics,political,primary,open,primaries,pa,riders,waste,accountable,govt,government,local,news,national,congress]
[where:pittsburgh,pa]

[category:news,politics]

NBC Media Bias in Post State of Union Jan 28, 2008

http://www.2partyReform.blogspot.com/
finding practical ways to move from a republic towards a democracy and holding the media accountable for substantive, critical reporting of important issues....


....
I watched the State of the Union on NBC and in their post coverage they interviewed Mitt Romney and then later Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama. They did not interview Senator John McCain or Mike Huckabee. You could argue they didn't allot enough time but no matter it is still biased to interview Mitt Romney and not Mccain and Huckabee. I went over to Fox News Channel and Mitt Romney was on critizicing McCain's legislative record and then they had 2 members of Congress respond to the Union address and then had John McCain on to answer questions about earmarks.









[what:pittsburgh,reform,us,city,state,council,politics,political,primary,open,primaries,pa,riders,waste,accountable,govt,government,local,news,national,congress]
[where:pittsburgh,pa]

[category:news,politics]

Monday, January 28, 2008

Transcript State of the Union George W Bush January 28 2008

http://www.2partyreform.blogspot.com/
finding practical ways to move from a republic towards a democracy and holding the media accountable for substantive, critical reporting of important issues....


....

link:

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7009860334


Transcript: President George Bush's State Of The Union Address 2008
January 28, 2008 11:53 p.m. EST




[what:pittsburgh,reform,us,city,state,council,politics,political,primary,open,primaries,pa,riders,waste,accountable,govt,government,local,news,national,congress]
[where:pittsburgh,pa]

[category:news,politics]

The few Republicans who said no to the Transportation Equity Bill 2005, Bridge to Nowhere etc

http://www.2partyreform.blogspot.com/
finding practical ways to move from a republic towards a
democracy and holding the media accountable for substantive, critical reporting of important issues....


Why does it matter now who voted in 2005 against the most wasteful spending bills Congress and a President ever passed? Because they are the only representatives you can look to for some measure of principle and fiscal responsibility. The bill also accounts for money spent up until 2009 which may well total beyond the 275 Billion Dollars initially passed. And now more people are talking about wasteful riders which aren't even voted on by Congress but make it into memos which direct the executive branch to spend the money anyways. We need an educated public which will demand Congress stop riders and pork barrel projects in general. This country's Congress is out of control and there are only a few members voting against these abusive and wasteful bills....

You can also consider this the list of Republicans who did not go against what the party's major principles are, namely fiscal responsibility and less government spending. Something which President George W Bush didn't seem to care about in the least. Chalk him up there with the likes of Richard Nixon as some of the worst Republicans to hold the office of Presidency in recent times (and regradless of party as well).

How the Senate voted in 2005:

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?cs_id=V3516

Senators who voted no ( 11 members total):

Republicans:
John S. McCain
Jon Kyl
Samuel D. 'Sam' Brownback
Judd A. Gregg
John E. Sununu
Lindsey O. Graham
Jim W. DeMint
Kay Bailey Hutchison
John Cornyn

Democrats:
Herbert H. 'Herb' Kohl
Russell D. Feingold


How the House voted:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-3

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2005-65

Who voted no (9 members)

all Republicans:

Nay AZ-3 Shadegg, John [R]
Nay AZ-6 Flake, Jeff [R]
Nay DE-0 Castle, Michael [R]
Nay FL-10 Young, C. W. [R]
Nay ID-1 Otter, C.L. [R]
Nay OH-8 Boehner, John [R]
Nay TX-13 Thornberry, William [R]
Nay TX-14 Paul, Ronald [R]
Nay WI-5 Sensenbrenner, F. [R]







[what:pittsburgh,reform,us,city,state,council,politics,political,primary,open,primaries,pa,riders,waste,accountable,govt,government,local,news,national,congress]
[where:pittsburgh,pa]

[category:news,politics]

Eminent Domain City of Stamford CT Curly's Diner 2006,2007

http://www.2partyreform.blogspot.com/finding practical ways to move from a republic towards a democracy and holding the media accountable for substantive, critical reporting of important issues....

older articles but this is the first time I've heard about this particular pathetic attempt by local government to seize private property for development, something which falls outside of the constitutionally assigned duties and limits of any local u.s. government body.

Cheeseburger, With a Side of Democracy

By JOSEPH BERGER
Published: July 7, 2006

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/07/nyregion/nyregionspecial2/09ctcol.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

quotes from the article:

For 25 years the revivifying City of Stamford has coveted the site of her plainspoken anachronism of a diner, with its Grecian blue banquettes, the obligatory boxes of miniature Frosted Flakes atop a glass case containing the obligatory rice pudding, and a rooftop sign that promises: "CURLEY'S WELCOME 24 HRS OPEN."

Fighting City Hall, though, was not a piece of cake and cost more than $100,000 in lawyer's fees. And the city pulled some tricks out of its sleeve. It put up a chain-link fence around three sides of the diner, blocking access to her rear parking lot and her Dumpster. Then health inspectors issued the diner summonses for not having a proper garbage outlet, but, hey, why have bureaucracies if you can't have a delicious Catch-22 now and then.

She also noticed that the parking enforcers were ticketing her customers for overstaying the sidewalk meters they were forced to use because her lot was sealed off. She herself got 50 tickets, perhaps a record for the owner of a Greek diner with its own parking lot. Now the city has completed blueprints for three apartment buildings that will wrap around her diner, almost literally since the walls will be up against the diner's walls. If the apartments are built, she won't be able to take garbage out a narrow alley she improvised on the side of the diner.

Although it is hardly the biggest campaign issue, that little diner may prove something of an albatross for Mayor Dannel P. Malloy as he heads into the Democratic gubernatorial primary on Aug. 8. Mistreating little people is never a wise idea for someone seeking votes, particularly if the victim has a story that would make Frank Capra or Preston Sturges salivate. She is not only an immigrant widow and mother of two, but she also raised two boys who were found in a car abandoned in her back lot. She even gives food away to homeless and mentally ill neighbors.

another article:

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fsb/fsb_archive/2007/04/01/8403853/index.htm








[what:pittsburgh,reform,us,city,state,council,politics,political,primary,open,primaries,pa,riders,waste,accountable,govt,government,local,news,national,congress]
[where:pittsburgh,pa]

[category:news,politics]





Saturday, January 26, 2008

Agency ordered to stop sewage overflows into Yough

http://www.2partyreform.blogspot.com/
finding practical ways to move from a republic towards a democracy and holding the media accountable for substantive, critical reporting of important issues....

various quotes from the article:

Agency ordered to stop sewage overflows into Yough
Friday, January 25, 2008
By Don Hopey, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08025/852084-85.stm?cmpid=localstate.xml

The Elizabeth Township Sanitary Authority, which illegally has allowed millions of gallons of raw sewage to flow into the lower Youghiogheny River during the past five months, has been ordered to reduce and eventually stop the overflows.

The overflows date to at least the summer of 2006, when a fisherman on the Yough reported seeing raw sewage along the river bank near the treatment plant's discharge pipe. The sanitary authority was ordered to put in a flow meter to measure the untreated sewage, but didn't do so until last August.

Part of the problem is that pipes connecting aeration and clarification tanks within the plant are too small to handle the flow of sewage. That prevents the plant from operating at full capacity, according to the state Department of Environmental Protection, which is working with the Health Department in the ongoing investigation.

"We don't understand how someone would not know there is a problem," said DEP spokeswoman Helen Humphreys.


The treatment plant and the township's separate sanitary sewer system were built in the early 1960s. The treatment plant, which originally had a capacity of 890,000 gallons a day, was upgraded several times, most recently in the late 1990s, and now has a maximum capacity of 2.3 million gallons a day.


The plant's average daily capacity is 1.4 million gallons, but Veolia Water North America Operating Services, a French-owned company hired to operate the facility, reported that it has been treating less than 1 million gallons a day, even while overflows have occurred.









[what:pittsburgh,reform,us,city,state,council,politics,political,primary,open,primaries,pa,riders,waste,accountable,govt,government,local,news,national,congress]
[where:pittsburgh,pa]

[category:news,politics]





Thursday, January 24, 2008

Raw sewage has been pouring into Lower Yough River for 1 year

http://www.2partyreform.blogspot.com/ finding practical ways to move from a republic towards a democracy and holding the media accountable for substantive, critical reporting of important issues....

The sewage has been pouring into the Lower Yough River for a year and this is the first time the public is hearing about it? 95 Million gallons in seven weeks? Who's jurisdiction? Allegheny County Health Department.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08017/849865-85.stm

Thursday, January 17, 2008
By Don Hopey, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The sewage overflows continued yesterday and have occurred every day since Nov. 25. During those seven weeks, more than 95 million gallons have flowed into the river, including one day, Dec. 16, that the overflow was measured at 6.3 million gallons.

....

Sewage pollution has been a problem for some time in the area:

Pipe Dreams: Sewage problems run deep in region

http://www.post-gazette.com/healthscience/20020714sewers0714P2.asp

While the rivers are usually polluted by sewage only during heavy rains, surveys done by 3 Rivers -- 2nd Nature, a river assessment project funded by The Heinz Endowments, shows that even in dry weather, most of the region's small streams don't meet water quality standards because of sewage contamination.

Collectively, those streams are four times as long as the region's rivers, and present proportionately greater health risks, especially for children who may play in or near the flows.


Schombert offers another reason to care about sewage flowing into rivers and streams: they supply almost 90 percent of the region's public drinking water.

...

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/cityregion/s_544484.html

Many lines -- for sewage, storm water or drinking water -- are a century old, said Stanley States, a microbiologist and water quality manager for the Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority. Deteriorating freshwater pipes might leak up to 25 percent of the water they transport, according to state Department of Environmental Protection data.


Area rivers are filthy with common ingredients found in plastics, detergents and contraceptives, says professor Conrad Dan Volz of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute's Center for Environmental Oncology. Those chemicals have caused male channel catfish in the Allegheny River to develop eggs in their testes, Volz said.

...

I wonder if it is has something to do with this project...

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/dailycourier/news/s_521012.html

Tuesday, August 7, 2007
Contractors likely will not finish the Yough Sanitary Authority public sewage project on time. The deadline is Sept. 10, but Shallenberger Construction is only 48 percent finished with laying pipe in Vanderbilt, Dunbar Township and Franklin Township, and 19 percent complete laying pipe in Dawson and Lower Tyrone Township. Port Vue Plumbing is 42 percent finished with the wastewater treatment plant and two pump stations. A-1 Electric, which cannot complete its work until the plant and pump stations are further along, is 35 percent finished.







[what:pittsburgh,reform,us,city,state,council,politics,political,primary,open,primaries,pa,riders,waste,accountable,govt,government,local,news,national,congress]
[where:pittsburgh,pa]

[category:news,politics]





PA Needs an open primary but how?

http://www.2partyreform.blogspot.com/ finding practical ways to move from a republic towards a democracy and holding the media accountable for substantive, critical reporting of important issues....

I've looked online for PA Open Primary Petitions but couldn't find any. Anyone out there know of one? Want to be sure before I start one. And if online is an effective method or should i go with paper.

as far as free sites i looked at this one http://www.thepetitionsite.com/

Rick B.

The truth about Riders, aka Congressional waste

http://www.2partyreform.blogspot.com/ finding practical ways to move from a republic towards a democracy and holding the media accountable for substantive, critical reporting of important issues....

I for one never knew until a few weeks ago that congressional riders were never part of actual appropriations bills, therefore not able to be signed into law by the president. They are the equivalent of memos to the executive branch so technically the money doesn't have to be spent on what it was "meant" for. Leave it to u.s. legislators to create the ultimate in waste and make sure it's not even part of the legislation.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119811356177641129.html?mod=Review-Outlook-US

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB119846367561248283-lMyQjAxMDE3OTI4NTQyNjUzWj.html


....

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119811356177641129.html?mod=Review-Outlook-US

The End of Earmarks?
December 20, 2007; Page A16

For those of us fated to watch annual State of the Union addresses, the most entertaining moments are when the Members all rise to cheer and applaud a Presidential statement they know is popular but they also know will never happen. Such a moment occurred in January, when President Bush declared:
"Over 90% of earmarks never make it to the floor of the House and Senate -- they are dropped into committee reports that are not even part of the bill that arrives on my desk. You didn't vote them into law. I didn't sign them into law. . . . The time has come to end this practice."
The Members whooped it up, with wide ironic grins, and even Mr. Bush had to smile at the spectacle. Well, here's an idea: How about if Mr. Bush now demonstrates that he meant what he said by making the Members live up to their applause?
The President has the opportunity to do this as part of the $516 billion omnibus spending bill that Congress passed this week. That bill contains 8,993 special-interest earmarks, but most of them aren't even in the language of the law itself. Instead, they are part of an accompanying 500-page "committee report" compiled by the House and Senate Appropriations Committees and staff. We doubt most Members have even seen the report.
Mr. Bush has said he'll sign the actual spending bill, but that doesn't mean he and his executive branch must spend that money on the earmarks in the committee report. A December 18 legal analysis by attorney Todd Tatelman for the Congressional Research Service concludes that "because the language of committee reports do not meet the procedural requirements of Article I of the Constitution -- specifically, bicameralism and presentment -- they are not laws and, therefore, are not legally binding on executive agencies." In plainer English, this means committee reports have not been formally passed by both houses and "presented" to the President for signing.
This means Mr. Bush has the legal authority not to fund these projects, which lack the force of law. Mr. Bush's own budget office has asserted this authority before. Earlier this year, then budget director Rob Portman instructed federal agencies that they could disregard committee report language on earmarks. "Unless a project or activity is specifically identified in statutory text, agencies should not obligate funds on the basis of earmarks contained in Congressional reports or documents," Mr. Portman wrote. That's why there were fewer earmarks last year.
Federal agencies would still be obligated to spend the money appropriated by Congress. But they could choose to spend those dollars on higher priorities that would benefit all taxpayers, rather than on favors for special interests or political donors. For example, the $700,000 for a bike trail in Minneapolis could be used to rebuild the collapsed bridge in that city and to strengthen others.
We hear the White House is exploring this option and that some in the Senate are urging him to take it. This won't make the President popular with Appropriators in either party, but it isn't as if he needs to store political capital for a reform agenda in his last year in office. Taxpayers would be grateful that someone is finally trying to discipline an earmark process that wastes money and has a record of inviting corruption. Mr. Bush has both the law and public opinion on his side.

.....

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB119846367561248283-lMyQjAxMDE3OTI4NTQyNjUzWj.html

The GOP and EarmarksDecember 24, 2007; Page A10
There's been quite a fuss over our Thursday editorial, "The End of Earmarks?", which recommended a way that President Bush could instruct federal agencies not to fund these special-interest projects sponsored by Members of Congress. No word yet about Senators leaping in protest from the Capitol Dome, but give it time.
Mr. Bush picked up the theme in his Thursday press conference by criticizing Congress for dropping 9,800 earmarks into its last-minute "omnibus" spending bill -- 11,900 if you include earmarks in the previously passed defense bill. "Congressional leaders ran in the last election on a promise that they would curb earmarks," Mr. Bush said. "And they made some progress and there's more transparency in the process, but they have not made enough progress." He added that he has asked his budget director, Jim Nussle, "to review options for dealing with the wasteful spending in the omnibus bill."
That's promising, and we're told there's a debate in the White House over what to do. Our suggestion is that Mr. Bush instruct his cabinet not to spend money on earmarks that aren't specifically mentioned in the language of the spending bill. Most are listed in accompanying Appropriations Committee reports that lack the force of law. The point of this Congressional ruse, in part, is to let Members "air-drop" earmarks at the last minute and thus escape scrutiny by other Members who might try to expose their "Bridges to Nowhere" on the House or Senate floor. Mr. Bush assailed this habit in this year's State of the Union address, and the Members cheered. So why not force Congress to live up to its applause?
Some in the White House fear that such a move would sour relations with Congress, including GOP leaders who love their earmarks as much as Democrats do. We hear that senior Republicans, especially in the Senate, have told the White House that if Mr. Bush refuses to fund these earmarks, he will be courting retribution. There's a reason no Members will make this threat in public, however. They know how unpopular earmarking is with the voting public.
Meanwhile, 19 taxpayer groups and individuals have written an open letter to Mr. Bush picking up on our proposal. The letter asks the President to issue "an executive order formally directing all Federal agencies to ignore non-legislative earmarks tucked into committee reports and statements of managers. Such an action is within your Constitutional powers, and would strike a blow for fiscal responsibility now while setting a valuable precedent for the future."
Congress would be able to rewrite the budget to add earmarks in formal legislative language. But at least then earmarks would be challengeable on the floor. Asked by CNBC's Larry Kudlow last week about earmarks, GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell replied that, "Well, there certainly have been some bad earmarks in the past. But you've got to remember, you can knock out all the earmarks, and it wouldn't save any money."
Well, $7.4 billion is real money where we come from, and that misses the way in which earmarks have become opportunities for corruption (felon Duke Cunningham) and an incentive for logrolling that increases overall spending. Mr. Bush and the GOP can take one more step toward restoring their fiscal credentials by striking a blow against "nonlegislative" earmarks.

Pittsburgh City Council OKs parcel sales to Downtown developer

http://www.2partyreform.blogspot.com/ finding practical ways to move from a republic towards a democracy and holding the media accountable for substantive, critical reporting of important issues....

Pittsburgh City Council OKs parcel sales to Downtown developer

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08024/851813-53.stm



So congratulations to Pittsburgh City Government for handing it's taxpayers a $4.17 million dollar loss on this sale to Millcraft Industries. This doesn't even begin to take into account the notion of illegitimate activity by city government in the form of a city government banking and real estate masquerade. For those who cry collusion (which is what people will say so they can still defend government spending in general) when has the URA and the city successfully brokered a deal which has ever really benefited the region economically?